Building "Thor"

[anonymous-user]

richw_82 said:

To do a mag check in an aircraft you test both sides. For the Shackleton (I've not been let loose with a Merlin yet...) set the engine to 2200rpm, drop one switch to off, the revs drop. Measure the drop, switch it back on, repeat process with the other switch. Briefly flick both off if one side showed no drop, to check for a live mag. There's negligible difference in using either magneto - if you switch either of them off there is a noticable - and measureable - drop in RPM.


Neither is listed as primary or secondary, and if you have a dual switch they are sometimes labelled 1 and 2. It varies from aircraft which is which, the only way to tell is to check the wiring diagram or the relevant AP manual.

Having said this - I am told by some of my REME friends that the magneto set up on the Meteor could be different to Merlin as the Army didn't want a tank engine to be quite as sensitive!

Not wishing to derail this thread too much, but the other fundamental difference with an aero engine is that @2200rpm it is under heavy load, because the prop is attached (rpm = power) whereas i am suggesting do the check at idle on an unloaded engine. In the aircraft, when you turn off on set of Mags, you do not re-align the ignition angle, so when you turn off one set, the slower burn moves Pmax backwards, and assuming the ignition angle was well set in the first place, reduces torque. However, with this meteor running on a modern EMS system, all you have to do is to advance the set ignition angle for running on one set of plugs and bingo, you are (practically) back where you started in terms of the crank angle position of Pmax (and hence torque)

(in reality, the slower burn will reduce thermal efficiency a tiny bit, as there is more time for heat to escape to the combustion chamber walls, but i don't think ultimate fuel economy is really an aim for this project..... ;-)

[ARAF]

Anything you can help with Storer?

http://www.lincolnshireecho.co.uk/Engine-problem-g...

[Storer]

What a shame as there have not been two Lancasters in the air together for quite a few years and 8 Merlins make a truly wonderful sound.

Hope they can fix it soon. They will have to, to get it back to Canada.


Paul

[ARAF]

Storer said:

What a shame as there have not been two Lancasters in the air together for quite a few years and 8 Merlins make a truly wonderful sound.

Hope they can fix it soon. They will have to, to get it back to Canada.


Paul

Maybe the Lanc wants to stay.

[Storer]

Interesting J Leno video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0HXxGjlIag

The spec of the engine for 1912 is quite remarkable. 3.67 litres per cylinder is pretty big too!!!



Paul

[guru_1071]

a lot of the prewar RR cars ran a ignition system that could be either coil or magneto driven, all you had to do was unplug a plug to move them around.

most cars just use the coils (as they are so reliable), and often the magneto option is either removed or incomplete.

my dad has one that is complete and years ago he was demonstrating it to someone, but didn't plug the plug all the way back in when he swopped - I spotted this (I was about 14) and grabbed the plug to push it home just at the exact moment he pressed the starter.

I can confirm that the jolt of electricity from a pre war magneto would probably re-start Frankenstein....


it hurt a bit.............

ive never touched that bloomin plug since!


the other 'party trick' they have is that once they are warm, you can switch the ignition on, move the advance and retard lever on the steering wheel, and the action of moving the dizzy back and forth will normally start that. it amazes people who have never seen it before!

Edited by guru_1071 on Wednesday 3rd September 11:34

[Brabus Jord]

Easternlight said:

Am I the only one that remembers this :-

I spotted this car today on the A303 going west bound. it was on the back of a lory. anyone know where it could be off too???

[JonRB]

Brabus Jord said:

I spotted this car today on the A303 going west bound. it was on the back of a lory. anyone know where it could be off too???

As far as I am aware, it lives abroad but returns to the UK annually for a UK MoT and UK tax.

[FBP1]

Haynes Motor Museum? Just off the A303.

[RoverP6B]

JonRB said:

As far as I am aware, it lives abroad but returns to the UK annually for a UK MoT and UK tax.

It was at Dunsfold Wings & Wheels on the penultimate weekend of August too.

[JonRB]

Interesting article in The Register today about a Meteor-engined Bentley 'Special', amongst others.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/26/hacking_lu...

[UltimaCH]

JonRB said:

Interesting article in The Register today about a Meteor-engined Bentley 'Special', amongst others.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/26/hacking_lu...

Excellent!

[Storer]

Interesting article. Sounds like a man after my own heart.

It is also a coincidence that I am now looking for a Bentley MK VI, R Type or S1 from the 1950s as the basis for my build. They are more in keeping with the age of a Meteor, are cheaper to buy and for parts (which are plentiful).

This time I want one that is past restoration but has a V5.


Paul

[ivanhoew]

what happened to the french car paul?

[guru_1071]

Storer said:

Interesting article. Sounds like a man after my own heart.

It is also a coincidence that I am now looking for a Bentley MK VI, R Type or S1 from the 1950s as the basis for my build. They are more in keeping with the age of a Meteor, are cheaper to buy and for parts (which are plentiful).

This time I want one that is past restoration but has a V5.


Paul

a mk6 / r type will be too small, a S1 is the thing to go for

flying spares have just the car for you


http://www.flyingspares.com/bentley-s3-fsd173

you can lengthen the chassis in the engine bay, and use an idler from a landrover to connect all the steering back up you can even convert it to wire wheels if you wish (but the banded steel wheel look would be epic!)


ive also seen a s series converted to front disc brakes so that's doable as well. (using modern master cylinders would be a must, the standard mechanical rod, mechanical servo with hydraulic after thoughts is rubbish)

a s3 is a better option than an s1 as the front suspension is a bit better - look at the exploded drawings and you will see that. it doesn't use the coarse threaded suspension blocks that wear like crazy - its more like a normal car.


john at horsefields in Halifax is the man to speak to about s series chassis mods - he is currently building a 1930's replica using a s1 chassis as a base - its a work of art

Edited by guru_1071 on Thursday 27th November 12:32

[Storer]

ivanhoew said:

what happened to the french car paul?

Robert
I had a fair amount of grief from people who thought it was too good to use as the basis for Thor. In the end I sold it on. I put a battery in it and a bit of fuel, I didn't even wash it and made a 15% profit over my costs. It is now in Belgium!

Guru
There is actually very little difference in the wheelbase between MK VI, R Type and the S1. The largest is about 129" versus 124" for the shortest. The Phantom II is 155".

The car has to be pre 1960 and have a V5 present to avoid any legal/MOT/registration issues. This excludes any new imports (unless they have a V5) or any barn find with no paperwork. The S3 is post 1960 so no good.


Paul

[guru_1071]

Storer said:

Guru
There is actually very little difference in the wheelbase between MK VI, R Type and the S1. The largest is about 129" versus 124" for the shortest. The Phantom II is 155".

The car has to be pre 1960 and have a V5 present to avoid any legal/MOT/registration issues. This excludes any new imports (unless they have a V5) or any barn find with no paperwork. The S3 is post 1960 so no good.


Paul

paul

its not just the length that will be an issue, but the strength of the stuff, the chassis, axles and steering on a mk6 etc is very light. that's why they are so popular to turn into those specials that the Bentley boys race - they are always a handful when a S1 motor is stuck into them, so a big boy like yours would be a bit to much!

in the past me and my brother have lifted a bare mk6 chassis between us - a s1 chassis - no chance!!!

the chassis on a s1 is miles deeper section and double skinned (sort of), so its capable of a lot more power and weight

[ivanhoew]

Storer said:

Robert
I had a fair amount of grief from people who thought it was too good to use as the basis for Thor. In the end I sold it on. I put a battery in it and a bit of fuel, I didn't even wash it and made a 15% profit over my costs. It is now in Belgium!



Paul

ah i see , good deal then ,and more money to plough into the project , nice .

its a shame one of the 1970's RR or RB would not do , a lot of car for micro money.


robert.

[PanzerCommander]

Storer said:

Robert
I had a fair amount of grief from people who thought it was too good to use as the basis for Thor. In the end I sold it on. I put a battery in it and a bit of fuel, I didn't even wash it and made a 15% profit over my costs. It is now in Belgium!

Guru
There is actually very little difference in the wheelbase between MK VI, R Type and the S1. The largest is about 129" versus 124" for the shortest. The Phantom II is 155".

The car has to be pre 1960 and have a V5 present to avoid any legal/MOT/registration issues. This excludes any new imports (unless they have a V5) or any barn find with no paperwork. The S3 is post 1960 so no good.


Paul

Fair enough on the profit made but I would just shrug and ignore them, its your car you can do with it as you please.

[JonRB]

The thing I liked from that Register article was how permissive the Bentley Owners Club are about 'specials'. Much kudos to them for that. So, given that, I would go down that route. Far better that than be shunned and spat upon (metaphorically) by some other marque.